Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

General topics about technical diving.
User avatar
dewmercer
Avid Diver
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:32 pm

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by dewmercer »

H20doctor wrote:im amazed that divers go over there to do such a dive.... seems a long way to go for a tech dive / scooter run..

Me 2. Don't know why but I still do it. Better than C2 for sho. More fun than the black shittyness of the lake trash too.
--
DAve Mercer
User avatar
Grateful Diver
I've Got Gills
Posts: 5322
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 7:52 pm

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by Grateful Diver »

dewmercer wrote:The line from the rock garden to sledgehammer is about 10000' long and runs at an average depth of 70' dropping down to 100 in places. It is periodically cleaned and repaired by various groups who use it for tec training and fun. Running the line from end to end is, imo, a dive of medium proportion as you typically need an extra scooter, maybe a bottom stage and, if you are fast, you'll need to spend about 10min on O2 when you're done. Its not a run for novices.

I agree that if its only purpose was as a navigational aid it could certainly be pulled and the scoot run could still be done. However, the training that takes place on it is tec line laying, line maintenance and training teams in running long lines on scoots with multiple cylinders, extra scoots, etc. Doing that type of training in clear water is easier and safer than doing it in the crap viz of Lake W or at C2 where viz is very hit and miss.

If the line was unused trash I'd say yank it but it is a frequently used underwater roadway. There was a big sign on it last year that was put in as a joke. It serves no purpose and should be pulled. If the line was a tangled mess or hazard I'd say repair it or yank it. It was not in that state last year and we'll be making any repairs needed this summer.

The argument that national parks should be left as they are is reasonable to a point but that would also mean that we should not build roads, trails, camp sites or anything else in them. We do these things to allow people to experience the park and have fun. The line is the same thing regardless of its being officially sanctioned. It helps divers who are interested in lines and line running have fun and train. It actually gives me a reason to visit the park as I generally find Lake C to be somewhat sterile and boring.

The line was laid in a long time ago (10+ years) and has become a fixture for many of us. I know the guys who put it in, the history that surrounds it (quite interesting if you're into that sort of thing) and the people who maintain it. Sure its not a natural artifact but if you are going to pull it up then I'd say get rid of the barge, the hidden village, the warren and steel cars also. Hell, Seacrest is a city park. Pull everything out of C2. Get rid of the fishing reef at salt water. Its the same argument and its not a good one.

Saying that the line sets a precedent is fair and I'd say that if lines were proliferating then it would be a dangerous and abused precedent. As far as I know, lines are not proliferating at Crescent so the precedent is not being abused. If it starts being abused the fix THAT problem.

The line is in no way offensive to the 99.999% of park visitors who will never even know it is there. I'd be surprised if most divers who use the park will ever see it and of those, very few will be offended. Just because you don't understand the why its there, why its useful and you just don't get what could ever be fun about lines in no way implies that it has no purpose and is not enjoyed by some.

I wish the dive community had some kind of organized voice in deciding how the park is used. We don't.

Please just leave the line alone. Its not hurting anybody or damaging the environment in any way. Its not a hazard. Its not detracting from anybodies experience of the natural beauty of the lake (at least as far as I know). Unilaterally deciding to pull it based on your assumptions and bias which may not be broadly shared is just as questionable as the original decision to put it in but there is nothing that can be done to change history.

Besides, if you tear it up (no small accomplishment and one which is somewhat risky) it will just get put back in and endless juvenile squabbling will ensue. The rangers will probably catch wind of it and they will then have an excuse to close the lake to divers as we are nothing but a bunch of litter bugs.
Dave, first off, thanks for the thoughtful post. It says something for us as a community that we can have a conversation like this and exchange differences of perspective without the rancor that usually accompanies such topics on an internet forum. I appreciate both the tone and the perspective.

I also want to point out that I'm not advocating pulling the line ... I'm asking those who use it to think about why their access to East Beach is being restricted, and to consider that maybe there's more to it than just a bias on the rangers' part toward a different group of users. The original post stated that East Beach is where this line originates, and that makes me think the rangers know it's there. He also said that there are other lines in the lake, and that makes me wonder how many ... who put them there ... why they're there ... and whether they're as "invisible" to the people who determine access as some of you seem to believe.

But the issue isn't really the line or why it's there. It's whether or not putting those lines in and leaving them in has an impact on park personnel's decision to allow diving access to the lake. Because if it does, then it impacts more people than just the handful of divers who find those lines useful. This isn't, in some aspects, any different than the issues faced by Florida cave divers when a handful of untrained people insist on their right to dive the caves. Sure, they have every right to be there ... but their doing so has a potential impact on everyone else's access to the place, because a third party gets to decide who gets that access, and if you give them a reason to say "no", a certain percentage of them surely will.

I'm not advocating one way or the other ... I haven't dived at Lake Crescent in about five years, and I can go the rest of my life without going back. So it doesn't particularly affect me. I'm just tossing some thoughts out there for you folks who do dive there to think about ... primarily the notion that if your access is being restricted, perhaps it's due to something you did or something you advocate doing rather than a simple case of bias on the part of park rangers.

It is a bit concerning to me that some in the tech community promote this as a "big dive" ... because that implies a mentality that will, at some point, attract someone who has no business being there. And all it will take to close Lake Crescent to diving forever will be a fatality that someone determines is due to the attraction of that line. It's concerning to me that the use of this line has turned into something of a competition between two different groups of divers ... because competition inherently results in people pushing things to greater limits, and in diving that sort of mentality will often lead to tragic consequences.

I understand the attraction ... but I don't think it's coincidence that there's already an access issue at the very place where that line begins. Maybe instead of looking at that as a bias you guys should look at it as a clue ... might just be the early warning of larger access issues to come, and give you some incentive to figuring out a way to head it off before it gets to that point ... because a larger access issue will affect a lot more than just the couple of small groups who put those lines in there and who enjoy using them.

Whatever you decide I wish you well ... because some of the people using that line are folks I think well of and consider friends, and I want you to be able to do the dives that make you happy. My purpose in posting is more to promote discussion and consideration than to take sides or to say that anybody's doing anything wrong. Just want to make that clear.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
Threats and ultimatums are never the best answer. Public humiliation via Photoshop is always better - airsix

Come visit me at http://www.nwgratefuldiver.com/
defied
I've Got Gills
Posts: 2057
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:14 pm

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by defied »

Avg depth == 65-70ffw.
Round trip == 3.25hrs.
100% deco == 25 minutes.
Dub 130’s recommended.
2 al80 travel stages.
1 al40 100% o2.
2 long life scooters.
No overhead environments

The only thing technical about it is the gear load, and trip time.

I think if anyone decides to go out and do the full run without experience won't reach deco obligations, nor 1k of line travel.

If they do happen to have all the gear, they most likely have a good computer to fly and determine deco obligations.
If they don't, then chances are they have issues that don't person to environment if there is an accident.

As far as competition, the only thing worth competing for is line maintenance.
We've already round tripped it many many times. It's a fun run with great scenery along the way.

It's brief because I'm on my phone.
D
User avatar
dewmercer
Avid Diver
Posts: 96
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2010 12:32 pm

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by dewmercer »

Bob,

I understood your point and didn't think you were advocating pulling it. The line starts in the rock garden which is not really East Beach, IMO anyway. Access at East Beach really sucks. I don't get it at all. If divers were in the swimming area for anything more than ingress/egress I could understand it. We try to play nice and enter at the far right side down the small path which is outside the swimming demarcation. Rangers have been there when we have and they have never hassled us.

If there are more lines in Crescent then they should be seriously thought about and maybe pulled. Aside from the issues you mention, lines can create a very real hazard. I won't unilaterally pull one unless I deem it a hazard.

Any tec dive is, or should be considered as, a "big" dive. Going past NDLs without the gas and skills to cleanly deco out can seriously mess you up. Considering a tec dive as trivial is complacent and that seldom results in anything good.
--
DAve Mercer
defied
I've Got Gills
Posts: 2057
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2008 8:14 pm

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by defied »

dewmercer wrote: Any tec dive is, or should be considered as, a "big" dive. Going past NDLs without the gas and skills to cleanly deco out can seriously mess you up. Considering a tec dive as trivial is complacent and that seldom results in anything good.
Correct:
"The only thing technical about it is the gear load, and trip time."

It's a "big" dive if you actually go far enough to have obligations. If you don't have the gear, it's not a big dive, it's a short run, and a long walk if you don't follow your turnaround time / gas.

I'm curious (Genuinely), how many divers that you (anyone) consider non-experienced have tracked the Alki line and have had serious issues? With worse viz and boat traffic, I assume that would be a good statistical reference point.

I only know a few who have, but nothing ever went wrong. They still knew their turnaround time, etc. And they flew their computers, which (Let's see how much shit this stirs up) will tell them they're getting close to, if not already in deco, and what their obligations are.

As far as East beach is concerned, they don't allow divers in the swim area, and you have to hump in from the side.
Usually that is made easier: Round trip it starting and ending at Sledgehammer. The only thing anyone might see (If they're looking hard enough) is bubbles.

Back to the line:
I'd rather clean up the lead engrained tin cans from the 50's-80's that are scattered down there by the thousands before I worry about a maintained, hazardous free nylon line that people use. If it wasn't being used, then sure, pull it.

D
User avatar
kdupreez
I've Got Gills
Posts: 1724
Joined: Mon Apr 20, 2009 3:27 am

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by kdupreez »

dewmercer wrote:Bob,
here are more lines in Crescent then they should be seriously thought about and maybe pulled. Aside from the issues you mention, lines can create a very real hazard. I won't unilaterally pull one unless I deem it a hazard.
Not to stir the pot, but if there is one line allowed, who's is it? And what makes the distinction on why its OK for some people to leave their lines and other are not allowed to?

In my opinion, the line should be removed. Especially if it promotes the notion of "its ok to leave lines" and that in turn leads to issues with access to dive sites for all of us.

I have not dog in this. but when more and more line gets put in because people seem to think its OK since others are doing it.. then that could become an issue for all of us.
"I believe that if life gives you lemons, you should make lemonade... And try to find somebody whose life has given them vodka, and have a party" - Ron White
User avatar
CaptnJack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 7776
Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 2:29 pm

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by CaptnJack »

kdupreez wrote:
dewmercer wrote:Bob,
here are more lines in Crescent then they should be seriously thought about and maybe pulled. Aside from the issues you mention, lines can create a very real hazard. I won't unilaterally pull one unless I deem it a hazard.
Not to stir the pot, but if there is one line allowed, who's is it? And what makes the distinction on why its OK for some people to leave their lines and other are not allowed to?

In my opinion, the line should be removed. Especially if it promotes the notion of "its ok to leave lines" and that in turn leads to issues with access to dive sites for all of us.

I have not dog in this. but when more and more line gets put in because people seem to think its OK since others are doing it.. then that could become an issue for all of us.
There have been ropes with bailout bottles on Sledgehammer wall in the past, there were there for months too. Although I'm not sure if they are still there. IIRC someone was working up to some sort of personal depth record there. Apparently he survived or quit the effort, I think we would have heard if there had been some sort of incident.

The Alki Plains line was removed after they finished that exercise/project, maybe 5 years ago? Lamont would know.

I am pretty sure the scooter run from East Beach / the Rock Garden all the way to Sledgehammer and back could be done without the line. In fact it could be done minus the stages and minus the deco if you just ran along the shoreline shallower. 3.5 hrs (or more) at 35-40ft on 32% is basically a no deco dive. Hard to know since the 70ft deep line has been there so long and people just follow that.

The Rock Garden would be a lot more attractive/photogenic without the line and associated junk (arrows etc.) For those who haven't seen it in person, there's actually more than one line, there are several "exit" lines which lead upslope (perpendicular) at various points along the main line to Sledgehammer. Those "exits" are marked with plastic line arrows.

Net, its a very well lighted, virtually hazard free, "cave" dive for those who can't or don't do scooter dives in actual caves. The main hazard would be boats and the failure to fly the legally required dive flag (towing one on a scooter sucks). Of course in actual caves, having or running a line is best practice since its a genuine overhead. In this case, the only thing remotely similar between Lake Crescent and a cave is this piece of nylon line and the plastic arrows and cookies on it as markers. Most cave divers consider the term "line follower" to be derogatory, yet in Lake Crescent line following for its own sake is actually relished. Its all very odd that this arbitrary and artificial construct has become a destination dive for some.
Sounder wrote:Under normal circumstances, I would never tell another man how to shave his balls... but this device should not be kept secret.
User avatar
Grateful Diver
I've Got Gills
Posts: 5322
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 7:52 pm

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by Grateful Diver »

dewmercer wrote: Any tec dive is, or should be considered as, a "big" dive. Going past NDLs without the gas and skills to cleanly deco out can seriously mess you up. Considering a tec dive as trivial is complacent and that seldom results in anything good.
I guess that's a matter of semantics ... or I guess just how you look at diving in general. To me it's less about the dive itself than the mentality that terms like "big" and "trivial" imply. To my way of thinking, there is no such thing as a trivial dive ... any time you put your head underwater you're taking risks, and those risks need to be properly assessed, planned and prepared for.

Sure, tech dives are harder ... overhead comes with its own set of risks ... and if you don't know how to assess, plan and prepare for them you shouldn't be doing those dives. But I don't view most tech dives as "big" dives. They're just dives that require more training, skill, preparation, and discipline because of those additional risk factors. No, they're not trivial, but there's more to the continuum than "trivial" and "big" ... and almost all of the dives we do fall somewhere in between.

Usually when I hear people calling a dive a "big" dive, they're looking for some kind of recognition of having done it ... and that mentality can lead people to doing dives they just shouldn't be doing. That applies as much to the tech diver pushing their skill set as it does the recreational diver doing "bucket list" dives in places like Cozumel, the Red Sea, or other places we all too frequently get to read about ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
Threats and ultimatums are never the best answer. Public humiliation via Photoshop is always better - airsix

Come visit me at http://www.nwgratefuldiver.com/
User avatar
Grateful Diver
I've Got Gills
Posts: 5322
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 7:52 pm

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by Grateful Diver »

CaptnJack wrote:Most cave divers consider the term "line follower" to be derogatory ...
... unless you happen to be one ... then it's an honest assessment of your skill set, and a recognition of your limitations. And if you can't be honest about those things, you have no business doing overhead diving ...

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
Threats and ultimatums are never the best answer. Public humiliation via Photoshop is always better - airsix

Come visit me at http://www.nwgratefuldiver.com/
User avatar
Jeff Pack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 3086
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by Jeff Pack »

Just to correct something on East Beach

The rangers objection is to not allow divers there for the sole reason to allow beach goers more access. Parking there to dive, even if you never hit the beach area will get you a ticket.

I queried both rangers on this to get the above answer, we even made a request to use the area when the area was empty and were denied.
=============================================

- I got a good squirt in my mouth
- I would imagine that there would be a large amount of involuntary gagging
- I don't know about you but I'm not into swallowing it

CCR discussion on Caustic Cocktails.
User avatar
Grateful Diver
I've Got Gills
Posts: 5322
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 7:52 pm

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by Grateful Diver »

Jeff Pack wrote:Just to correct something on East Beach

The rangers objection is to not allow divers there for the sole reason to allow beach goers more access. Parking there to dive, even if you never hit the beach area will get you a ticket.

I queried both rangers on this to get the above answer, we even made a request to use the area when the area was empty and were denied.
... whatever they're telling you, I have to believe something caused these people to decide that divers aren't worth the trouble of allowing them the access ... I used to dive East Beach regularly, back when my friend in Port Angeles was still diving cold water ... and I never had any access issues.

... Bob (Grateful Diver)
Threats and ultimatums are never the best answer. Public humiliation via Photoshop is always better - airsix

Come visit me at http://www.nwgratefuldiver.com/
User avatar
Jeff Pack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 3086
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by Jeff Pack »

This policy comes from the head ranger in port Angeles, the local ranger actually felt we deserved access as much as beach goers, but the pa guy is his boss, and actually suggested writing the head rangers boss with our concerns.
=============================================

- I got a good squirt in my mouth
- I would imagine that there would be a large amount of involuntary gagging
- I don't know about you but I'm not into swallowing it

CCR discussion on Caustic Cocktails.
imjustdave
Hi, I'm New To NWDC!
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2013 4:44 pm

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by imjustdave »

Jeff Pack wrote:This policy comes from the head ranger in port Angeles, the local ranger actually felt we deserved access as much as beach goers, but the pa guy is his boss, and actually suggested writing the head rangers boss with our concerns.
So what is the fine amount and what does one write on the ticket? Am I not a beach goer I go to the beach and then I go into the water... I eventually come out of the water again... I think this would be a fun ticket for a lawyer to run with.


David
User avatar
Jeff Pack
I've Got Gills
Posts: 3086
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 8:51 am

Re: Leftover Guide Lines in Lake Crescent

Post by Jeff Pack »

Actually, this is all old news now. Jared Jensen contacted the administrative side of Nat Parks, and the unwritten ban of diving parking sort of "went away". I also confirmed this as well, and even spoke with one of the Rangers recently as well.

Although the word on this hasn't been fully disseminated to all Park Enforcement, as recently a few divers got rousted, but they were armed with the new information, so they were let be. The big thing is to NOT enter for diving via the beach area during the closed months, but enter way off at the edge.
=============================================

- I got a good squirt in my mouth
- I would imagine that there would be a large amount of involuntary gagging
- I don't know about you but I'm not into swallowing it

CCR discussion on Caustic Cocktails.
Post Reply